Travel & Internationalization

Is the antiwar message of low priority to many libertarians-ancaps? I am noticing that on the many platforms where liberty people can be vocal that the many wars, prohibitions and the tip of the spear of governance and coercion seems to be at times avoided and other times simply dismissed.

Why is this ? And if it relates to yourself, why is it not that important?

Otherwise go on discussing abstracts dealing with the NAP or how we can split hairs in Euro-American political matters picking one evil over another.

Just a rough guess and might be going after a straw man; It seems many so-called libertarians especially those in the US come from a “conservative/right-wing” background which believes warfare and conflict are natural yet unfortunate elements of civilization and that although bad what is worse is economic control. The problem is they don’t put two and two together.

War is the health of the State. The more a State involves itself in conquest and exploitation abroad, the more it will restrict freedom at home. The most militaristic State is the most socialist State, there is no getting around this. In the US there is a lot of capital and opportunity for individual business so people tend to forget these things compared to more observable socialistic States like Venezuela.

I think that much of that is true. Here also in Australia it is similar. With some being very passionate about the flag waving and overt jingoism while paying lip service to the idea of liberty.

They may share memes about antifa or SJWs while intellectually they masturbate every time men in uniforms blow to pieces distant impoverished strangers for them, or they mourn the same uniforms with religious reverence as they return home beneath nationalistic cloth.

Or…they simply just do not care. War is for others. Regulation on lollies and what some socialist upstart has to say about pronouns is here. I guess we all have our priorities, unfortunately for millions our nations government destroy their ability to have any choices other than the barest, if any at all.

I think it’s more so that on liberty-minded social networks and forums people (myself included) bring up hot-button issues that have some room for interpretation and are actively contested among people who are already a part of the discussion, such as abortion, immigration, or intellectual property. From what I’ve seen, libertarians across the entire spectrum unanimously agree that war is when the state is at its fullest. Even the most moderate of moderate “libertarian conservatives” agree that the US hasn’t participated in a justified military conflict since at least WWII. The same applies to issues like the war on drugs or firearm ownership. Nearly everyone agrees on it, so there’s not much of a reason to bring it up.

That having been said, I think Kevin is also right to some degree. In the US, most libertarians come from a Republican background, and I’d say that at least half of them never truly break away from the “Tea Party Libertarian Lite™” position. Even a lot of people I once respected were allured back to that stance during the 2016 election.